We
predicted that months ago. That's not a poke at Mrs. Kelly; it's an acknowledgment
of Alabama's Republican leaning.

And
that's not a problem. It's fine that most residents here voted for Mitt Romney
on Election Day with no hesitation.

The
problem is that those hundreds of thousands of votes for Romney in Alabama
didn't get counted with the other millions of Romney votes across the country.
Instead, they only guaranteed that Romney got Alabama's nine Electoral College
votes.

That
nine wasn't enough to get much attention from either of the candidates during
the campaign. That nine wasn't enough to get Romney over the hump on Election
Night.

The
Electoral College made sense when it was crafted by the founding fathers during
the constitutional convention. According to the U.S. National Archives and
Records Administration, or NARA, website, the Electoral College was a
compromise between electing the president by a vote of Congress or by a popular
vote of the people - neither of which was viewed as desirable or feasible at
the time.

The
system gives each state two electors based on the two U.S. senators from each
state, plus a number of electors based on the number of U.S. representatives
from each state. In Alabama, that's makes a total of nine electors.

If
you voted for President Obama, it didn't matter because all nine of Alabama's
Electoral College votes went to Romney. Even though Obama won the presidency,
your vote didn't count toward his victory.

If
you voted for Gov. Romney, your vote contributed to him almost winning the popular
vote. Late into the night, Romney continued to lead the overall vote, even
though he'd already lost the Electoral College. Even if he'd won the popular
vote, he still would have lost the election. If you voted for Romney, your vote
didn't matter.

The
Electoral College is not a bad or evil or corrupt system. It's a legitimate
process, but it's one that prioritizes the vote of the state's electors over
our votes as individuals. Not to mention that it's part of the reason we're
stuck with a two-party system that makes it virtually impossible for
independent candidates to run for president.

Also,
the Electoral College has a greater impact on local elections than we care to
admit. Because Alabama, for instance, is a foregone conclusion in the Electoral
College, some people - Republican and Democrat - don't bother to vote. How many
local races might have turned out differently this year had more people believed
their vote for president would matter?

That's
why it's time to drop the Electoral College and move to the popular vote in
electing the leader of the free world. There's no good reason not to do it,
only superficial ones.

One
fear is that, under a popular-vote system, candidates will only target the
country's population centers during the campaign.

So
the worry is that Alabama might not get inundated with campaign rallies, robo
calls and endless commercials.

Fine.

Plus,
how is that different from today?

The
difference under the popular-vote system is that on Election Day, your vote
would actually matter, especially in an election as close as this year's. Under
the popular vote, we'd consistently get a true reflection of the will of the
people. Isn't that what the election is supposed to be about?

Since the Electoral College process is part of
the original design of the U.S. Constitution, the NARA website says it would be
necessary to pass a constitutional amendment to change the current system.

Unlike
the Alabama Constitution, changing the U.S. Constitution is not done routinely
or haphazardly, nor should it be. But if there's anything worthy of an
amendment to that sacred document, it's any effort to make sure the vote of the
people - all of the people - matters.

We
have the technology to count every single vote. It's high time that every
single vote counts.